Renewable EnergyDiscussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

Above is just the First Part of a series of Videos I will be uploading in my YT Chanel...

I would ask to please, -basically from the skeptics end- before start writing negative opinions about my work to be displayed here...to fully engage Your brains with your fingers...

Thanks!

Now, related to the Video Tests:

First notice that NO MOVING BODIES are present at any of the tests conducted.(Conductor(s) or Magnet) and that such motion (derivative of Time)from at least one of the bodies must be present in the typical Faraday-Maxwell-Lenz equations to obtain a Positive or Counter EMF from that type of Induction.

During all testing on above Video, the magnet and conductors/coils remain static by firmly attached to a very heavy piece of steel.

So, the displacement of the Dielectric Field is achieved simply by Attraction to Contact at the upper pole of the magnet from a solely -not winded, not magnetized- and loose piece of iron cylinder. Where Gravity and Attraction by dropping this cylinder on top is the only "effort" done to achieve this output measurement.

Now, if we all go to Page 91 from Ken Wheeler's book we read clearly:

Quote:

Magnetism is dimensional, the dielectric is intradimensional, or in counterspace, and only when these two Ether fields move against each other over time is there electrification, which is the Ether in a modality of dynamic polarization.

Out of that statement above I will cite the most relevant part (in bold and underlined) that I have based all my Video testings:

ONLY when these two Ether fields move against each other over time is there electrification.

And by just making contact with a piece of ferromagnetic material volume to one of the magnet's poles, we are displacing this dielectric field, or moving it against the spatial polarity where the conductors are capturing the charges.

Concluding...That I am NOT moving either Magnet nor Conductor(s) during all the tests, therefore, there are NOT any "cutting" of any "Lines of Force" taking place.

At around 15:31 in TEST 7, I am showing what the Output Sinewave would look like if I move that same Coil related to the Magnet... shape and measurement difference is clearly observed compared to Dielectric displacement output.

The Results from all tests clearly demonstrates that conductors must be placed exactly at the levels where the displacement is taking place during the Interaction, meaning -for this particular case- from the Middle to the Top of the Magnet embodiment, in order to obtain the highest values, whether Negative or Positive outputs.

When conductors are placed either at middle or bottom levels of the magnet, is obtained a lower output, but primarily, we capture a "mixed" positive-negative values due to both polarization's being disturbed due to the inertial dielectric displacement.

Actually the "sufficient proof" of dielectric output measurement could have ended right at TEST 3 (10:53) with the last 1/4 inch copper ring...and the reason why I started testing "Spiral Type Structures"...is to notice the difference in gain, since we are only capturing one revolution of energy displacement with solid/single conductors volumes...and not several, like we observe as the higher number of turns coils are used...to the point of lighting a small LED.

THE DEMONSTRATION OF VORTICITY IN THE MAGNETIC FIELDS POLARIZATION (17:35)

This final testing is so simple...that actually will need no explanation, after watching video.

The Vortex rotation of both polarization types or poles, versus the way we set our coils in either two ways...:

1- Following the same direction (Coil winding versus Spatial Field)...or

2- Following opposite directions between each others.

Where I do find an interesting result is when is used the same directions on both components (either CW-CW or CCW to CCW)...and the big difference in output obtained. And on this tests I have a loose spool of winded wires, which is so easy to reverse...BUT, when we are winding into the steel core of any electro-dynamic machine...there is not an "option" to take it off and reverse it that simple...

Concluding that there are some noticeable losses when both components are interacting opposite to each others.

I only hope that all this work will serve to enlighten others...and start understanding that the "Classic Magnetism" we have been taught is completely wrong and so far apart from reeality in every aspect we look at it. And as a result, all our designed Electrodynamic Machines will never be perfect unless we have full domain of this concepts.

First notice that NO MOVING BODIES are present at any of the tests conducted.(Conductor(s) or Magnet) and that such motion (derivative of Time)from at least one of the bodies must be present in the typical Faraday-Maxwell-Lenz equations to obtain a Positive or Counter EMF from that type of Induction.

Hi Ufo,

I watched the video and see that every pulse on the scope is a result of you moving an iron cylinder to the top of the magnet with the coil around it. That iron cylinder is a moving body.

I watched the video and see that every pulse on the scope is a result of you moving an iron cylinder to the top of the magnet with the coil around it. That iron cylinder is a moving body.

This is just an observation and not intended to start any argument.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

I am referring basically to the Two (2) Main and simple "Bodies" intervening in Faraday's Induction...which are strictly "Conductor" and "Magnet".

In this case the "third body" or the Iron Cylinder is utilized as an exciter to displace the dielectric field towards it.

However, at any point the iron cylinder movement is causing any of the Two Main Bodies cited above to move...right?

If you agree to the above...then we could step into my following question to you:

According to the well known Faraday's Induction concepts...Am I cutting any lines of force in any those tests, except at 15:31 TEST 7 (Duh) or the test where I move the larger coil related to magnet to demonstrate Faraday's Induction wave-output?

I am referring basically to the Two (2) Main and simple "Bodies" intervening in Faraday's Induction...which are strictly "Conductor" and "Magnet".

In this case the "third body" or the Iron Cylinder is utilized as an exciter to displace the dielectric field towards it.

However, at any point the iron cylinder movement is causing any of the Two Main Bodies cited above to move...right?

If you agree to the above...then we could step into my following question to you:

According to the well known Faraday's Induction concepts...Am I cutting any lines of force in any those tests, except at 15:31 TEST 7 (Duh) or the test where I move the larger coil related to magnet to demonstrate Faraday's Induction wave-output?

Thanks

Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

In my opinion, you are altering the magnetic flux pattern when you introduce the iron cylinder into the magnet circuit. This action changes the flux lines cutting the coil and therefore represents dΦ/dt. The change of the flux does not require movement of the coil or of the magnet.

Also, when the iron cylinder comes into contact with the magnet, there is a noticeable sound (clank). So it appears that there is an impact between the cylinder and the magnet. This undoubtedly causes some relative motion between the coil and magnet because they are not rigidly fixed to each other.

I can't speculate as to the proportion the spike is due to the top or second paragraph above. But it might be interesting to see if you scope (very nice, BTW) could expand the pulse on the time scale.

It is well known that if we attempt to apply Maxwell's electrodynamics, as conceived at the present time, to moving bodies, we are led to asymmetries which does not agree with observed phenomena. Let us think of the mutual action between a magnet and a conductor. The observed phenomena in this case depend only on the relative motion of the conductor and the magnet, while according to the usual conception, a distinction must be made between the cases where the one or the other of the bodies is in motion. If, for example, the magnet moves and the conductor is at rest, then an electric field of certain energy-value is produced in the neighborhood of the magnet, which excites a current in those parts of the field where a conductor exists. But if the magnet be at rest and the conductor be set in motion, no electric field is produced in the neighborhood of the magnet, but an electromotive force which corresponds to no energy in itself is produced in the conductor ; this causes an electric current of the same magnitude and the same career as the electric force, it being of course assumed that the relative motion in both of these cases is the same.

The above quoted paragraph is just at the beginning of the full article originally written in 1905, being this the start to Special Relativity Theory presentation...The reason why I brought it here (and actually I would have loved to add it to video, but I was very restricted with time) is because of Einstein's very well defined Title and description about the only two "considered" possibilities -and up to now- between two "physical entities" or "Bodies" probabilities of interactions between them...which are very clear:

We whether move magnet while leaving conductor at rest...or We move conductor while leaving magnet at rest...

So, it is either one or two...right?

And we all must realize that from this simple "dichotomy" that started from Faraday's days...to date...has derived in the way we have been designing and constructing "officially" Electric Generators for two Centuries.

Never a "Third Body" or even a Third Possibility got to participate in this "very private and conservative" exchange?!...

In my opinion, you are altering the magnetic flux pattern when you introduce the iron cylinder into the magnet circuit. This action changes the flux lines cutting the coil and therefore represents dΦ/dt. The change of the flux does not require movement of the coil or of the magnet.

But of course the "magnetic flux pattern" has "changed" due to the iron proximity to contact.

Now (the 1M dollars question)...is how it has actually "changed" is where the real answer lies...

If we go based on the geometrical description to cause flux over time displacement; please realize that the time taken is 1/500 milliseconds (Scope is set at 500 mS)...and iron "fall" is as vertical as possible...And if we go by the known structure of Domain Walls (by the way, did you convince of its existence since our last exchange?)...We are only displacing the "reversing wall" by bringing it upwards within the coil range...and that will cause a very fast and very short "up-down" signal of almost not noticeable measurements.

Quote:

Also, when the iron cylinder comes into contact with the magnet, there is a noticeable sound (clank). So it appears that there is an impact between the cylinder and the magnet. This undoubtedly causes some relative motion between the coil and magnet because they are not rigidly fixed to each other.

Negative, the sound you heard is just the damping vibration of steel hitting another hard metal (Neodymium magnet) plus the heavy steel base it is seating/attracted/attached strongly to...

For example: I could get a metal bat...aluminum for an instance, and hit a very high, rigid, solid and metal pole stuck on the ground...and for sure you will do hear a very loud "clank" noise...however, I bet you I have not moved that steel pole even a fraction of a mm...I for sure moved as well as my bat...

Quote:

I can't speculate as to the proportion the spike is due to the top or second paragraph above. But it might be interesting to see if you scope (very nice, BTW) could expand the pulse on the time scale.

Regards,

bi

Can't relate it to either one...the size of that signal is too high related to either the flux/time variation...or the very tight and short vibration (clanking noise) taking place...

Please look at the beginning of video where I show the approximate displacement of the Dielectric Field observed through viewing film with the same iron cylinder...now that IS a much bigger displacement than both of your above cited examples.

A very simple way to expand signal (spike) over time is by an ancient engineering method still applied up to now...:

By repetition of the single/modular structure

...that gives rise to all kind of different types of machines...right?

The other way would be by steel/iron vibration at the perfect distance and amplitude range.

I have done a lot more tests than the only ones shown on video...and the more copper I add to coil...the higher the spike gets...it seems there are no "spatial limits" as width expansion of the coils.

Finally I do have another question...

In the case I would be just making the "Typical Faraday Induction" (which I am very sure I am not)...then where is the negative equation of the same magnitude represented by Lenz Law in that signal?

...then where is the negative equation of the same magnitude represented by Lenz Law in that signal?

As in E = - dΦ/dt. It is arbitrary since you choose the direction of coil turns, polarity of the magnet and polarity of the scope. If you could actually analyze and define the flux field change in the space occupied by the coil, then you could see that the polarity of E would adhere to Lenz.

As in E = - dΦ/dt. It is arbitrary since you choose the direction of coil turns, polarity of the magnet and polarity of the scope. If you could actually analyze and define the flux field change in the space occupied by the coil, then you could see that the polarity of E would adhere to Lenz.

bi

Oh come on Bistander,

Sorry, but it seems you are now running out of "other logical possibilities" so then you are resorting to nonsensical ones.

The direction of the last tested coil, the highest output one...I swap it so many times related to also so many different probabilities...however, ALL just rendered/pointed to the expected results according to the Vorticity of each tested polarized field versus the winding directions.

Besides, you know that everything here is Relative...A loose Coil only needs to be wounded one way, then just by turning it related to magnet axis we have exactly the opposite geometries.

You also know exactly what a typical moving coil into magnet induction sine wave output of plus and minus over time would look like...where it is very obvious the In-Out signal reflecting in sine plus sine minus...where Lenz would exactly that same sine but minus...and not only in a simple math formula...but real observation on scope...No such thing here, it is just a very straight up vertical spike with the negative also reflected and written there in every test.

I chose the Polarity of the Scope?...

That was the best one you have shot so far...I thought you knew better than that!

You know the Scope, any scope, would "interpret" (meaning process) ANY Signal...and send it to screen the right way?...no matter if I just use One Terminal...the "Positive" or the Probe Pen without the gator clips?

Now, please, let's take a brake from our dialogue here...and let me hear what others have to say...

As in E = - dΦ/dt. It is arbitrary since you choose the direction of coil turns, polarity of the magnet and polarity of the scope. If you could actually analyze and define the flux field change in the space occupied by the coil, then you could see that the polarity of E would adhere to Lenz.

I am still listening to the presentation guys, great info but I think
the simple explanation to how right Ken is comes down to seeing
fields with more modern techniques. We have all of the work of
Howard Johnson that no one seems to ever talk about that was done
long before Ken came around.

When it comes right down to who is right and who is wrong about
possible theories I will always stick to the rule of thumb procedure
I came up with many years ago that goes like this:

If the university told you that the theory is one way and someone
told you it is another, it probably is a lie on the college level side or
let's say "Not the whole truth"

It is video's like UFO has put out here today that are far more
enlightening and there is no teacher there to tell you to go sit
in the corner when the students begin questioning the faulty reasoning
that "They" call concrete. Many you men and women have pointed out
how they view any experiment with very young, sharp minds who
have been told they were wrong, when in fact were seeing clear.

For this I have developed a righteous hatred for arrogant bullies who
never once in their lives gave precedence to any real science, only
show-boatings religion.

Hats off to UFO and any real thinker who is not a push over taking it laying down because "TEACHER SAYS SO"

Inside the magnet there is not an all North domain on one end and an all South domain on the other end divided by a wall down the middle. I don't believe there is anything "in" the magnet in the middle which shows as the white line on your images.

Up to that discussion we had in the above quoted post from you in another thread...you did not even know about the proven discovery and existence of a Main Domain Wall or Bloch Wall, exactly in the middle of every single magnet in the world...search Felix Bloch discovery of its structure.

If you keep looking at a Magnetic Field as a One(1) simple loop from North to South...Ignoring any center "interference" like in reality takes place....then all those formulas will look nice and dandy...but they don't apply when we see the real deal.

If You insist on keeping the same Closed Mind about something proven otherwise, then that is called stubbornness, and I can't keep dealing with a completely closed mind.

There is absolutely no angle between iron cylinder and magnet cylinder, they interact exactly in a straight, vertical line. And it is NOT just to "place" cylinder on top of magnet's pole...there must be a directional space travel accelerated by SELF attraction or like Ken calls it a Linear Voidance.

It is way more than what we all have learned, the formation of a dielectric plane right at the tip of iron cylinder under the influence of the field shows there is more involved that simply comes to when dealing with classic magnetism...Or is it a secondary "Domain Wall" formed there?...absolutely NOT, Domain Walls are supposed to form between Two Opposite Domains, a North and a South...in this case the iron is just an extension of whatever that influenced polarization was, a continuation...so what it is formed there on the tip of the iron cylinder?

When we approach two magnets by their opposite/alike poles the formation of a "Third dielectric field" (having in mind there are one dielectric at each magnet's center) takes place, except that it forms exactly in the middle of "nowhere"...in the exact space between both N-S poles, no matter if the distance to approach varies...the "constant" field will remain right in the middle spatial between both bodies, until they make contact, then all fields UNIFY into just one...right at center of the two magnets...

So then We could ask ourselves...Does a Domain Wall can form right in the middle of the Space between Two Opposite Polarization separated by a considerable air gap?...and not only within the ferromagnetic mass?

Those facts above will change everything right?

The "N-Machine" from DePalma shows clearly the collection of Energy Differential between equatorial plane of Magnet and either one of the two extremes center...and so Faraday's Disc...None of this "phenomena" has been explained clearly by Classic Magnetism.

If you think this Video was mind boggling...then just wait for Machine Applications, and please fasten your seat belts...

I like that video, the guy is good, fast, sharp...I love that kind.

Particularly a paragraph I have copied from time 14:36:

Quote:

Scientists blindly defend what they were taught (most really don't understand what they were taught); therefore, science has become a religion based on blind faith.

Where I kind of disagree with Distinti's Magnetic Wave Theory...is that we can not just simply "jump" to the New Theories of Magnetic Waves structures...IF our simple and merely Source, the Field, the Magnet, the Electromagnet... has not been dissected to the Max possibilities by experiments.

However, I do agree there are electromagnetic waves that travel at a distance...But my focus at this point is still in the close range distance effects primarily...Why?...just because they are the ones directly involved when we are talking about Electrodynamic Machines development...

If you think this Video was mind boggling...then just wait for Machine Applications, and please fasten your seat belts...

I like that video, the guy is good, fast, sharp...I love that kind.

Particularly a paragraph I have copied from time 14:36:

Where I kind of disagree with Distinti's Magnetic Wave Theory...is that we can not just simply "jump" to the New Theories of Magnetic Waves structures...IF our simple and merely Source, the Field, the Magnet, the Electromagnet... has not been dissected to the Max possibilities by experiments.

However, I do agree there are electromagnetic waves that travel at a distance...But my focus at this point is still in the close range distance effects primarily...Why?...just because they are the ones directly involved when we are talking about Electrodynamic Machines development...

That is my "Field" so far...

Thanks again and Kind Regards

Ufopolitics

Hi UFO.
Glad you liked it. This guy is also very 'common sense' driven and that's what I like.
I am not a blind follower and do not agree to all he (or anybody else) is putting forward but I have the greatest respect for guys like him and you that put so much effort in trying to get a better understanding of the world around us.

After watching several YT videos I am more and more becoming convinced that there are big differences between permanent Magnets fields and electro magnetic fields. One video ( I think it was by Tinman) showed clearly the vortex of a permanent magnet, whereas the electromagnet didn't

Again, looking forward for your next installments. The more you puzzle me, the more I like it.
Thanks again.
Best regards,
Ben

Inside the magnet there is not an all North domain on one end and an all South domain on the other end divided by a wall down the middle. I don't believe there is anything "in" the magnet in the middle which shows as the white line on your images.

Up to that discussion we had in the above quoted post from you in another thread...you did not even know about the proven discovery and existence of a Main Domain Wall or Bloch Wall, exactly in the middle of every single magnet in the world...search Felix Bloch discovery of its structure.

Hi Ufo,

Unless you're God, you cannot state with any certainty what I knew. And awareness and acceptance are different.

At any rate, my point is that there are millions of very small (microscopic) domains in that magnet of yours, not 2 like you illustrate and seem to believe. It is my understanding that each domain has walls between it and its neighbors. How many of these walls are Bloch walls? I don't know. But I do not believe there is a dividing wall at the geometric center between the north and south poles of every magnet.

You say there is and call it a main domain wall or Bloch Wall and also a dielectric plane. I don't know about that for sure. Heck, I don't even know what a dielectric plane is. You and Ken seem to need counterspace to explain that. So let's not go there.

I know this is from wikipedia, but I have seen it elsewhere many times and believe it is an actual microphotograph of domains.

Quote:

Photomicrograph of NdFeB, the magnetic material used to make neodymium rare earth magnets, under a Kerr-microscope, showing the magnetic domain structure. The metal is composed of microscopic crystal grains. The domains are the light and dark stripes faintly visible within each grain. Due to magnetic anisotropy, the crystal lattice of each grain has an "easy" preferred direction of magnetization, and the domains form as stripes roughly parallel to this direction. The magnetization of light and dark domains is opposite, parallel to their long axis. In most of the grains the domains are parallel to the surface, but in the outlined grain the "easy" direction of magnetization is almost vertical, so only the ends of the domains are visible. ).

After watching several YT videos I am more and more becoming convinced that there are big differences between permanent Magnets fields and electro magnetic fields. One video ( I think it was by Tinman) showed clearly the vortex of a permanent magnet, whereas the electromagnet didn't

Again, looking forward for your next installments. The more you puzzle me, the more I like it.
Thanks again.
Best regards,
Ben

Yes, definitively an electromagnet and a magnet project different fields...

If we were in a stage of Higher Civilization scientific levels...where we all have recognized the Aether back again as the main force that creates and moves everything at universal scale...then I could explain that difference easily...but I will try in the best of my ability without perturbing other closed minds...by keeping it all still in a "Theory"...

Say that every time we create a Permanent Magnet by dumping a fast and high DC-Coil electrification to a ferromagnetic mass...we are not just "aligning" straight all particles into microscopic domains within that object that run from end to end without any recognition of domain walls typical explanation from old concepts...But instead all we are doing is opening a permanent Aether gate that concentrates right at the center plane of that volume...to create both known polarized and spatial ends...and vualß we have a Magnet.

Then we could conclude that an Electromagnet is just a Permanent Magnet in a starting process... where that "Aether Gate" is just a "momentary" one, because we have not provided the required energy dump to open it permanently...and it is dependent upon the fluctuations of our source feeding that coil...for example, if it was an AC Source, the sine wave +/0/- fluctuations will cause gate to open-close-revert...if it was a pulsed DC +/0/+...then open-Close deal...or if just a straight, linear DC...that does not reach the top values to fully open it...resuming that in all three cases of electromagnets, the gates would be very different than the one formed permanently on a magnet. Therefore, none of their projecting fields would be the same.

However, an electromagnet has properties that a permanent magnet could never do, just because its permanently situation...

Unless you're God, you cannot state with any certainty what I knew. And awareness and acceptance are different.

At any rate, my point is that there are millions of very small (microscopic) domains in that magnet of yours, not 2 like you illustrate and seem to believe. It is my understanding that each domain has walls between it and its neighbors. How many of these walls are Bloch walls? I don't know. But I do not believe there is a dividing wall at the geometric center between the north and south poles of every magnet.

You say there is and call it a main domain wall or Bloch Wall and also a dielectric plane. I don't know about that for sure. Heck, I don't even know what a dielectric plane is. You and Ken seem to need counterspace to explain that. So let's not go there.

I know this is from wikipedia, but I have seen it elsewhere many times and believe it is an actual microphotograph of domains.

bi

Bistander,

See, that is your problem on above quoted post...you keep looking at the microscopic levels while ignoring (or simply denying to accept) the Big Picture. And I really can not understand why?...if you can find those images all over the net!!!

And I have uploaded some of them that I thought displayed a better understanding into my Photobucket, for you to analyze better on this Forum previously...now I see it was in vain...so, my final conclusion is that you are in one of those two "States of Mind" I cited before...or maybe both simultaneously, idk...:

1- Ignoring it.
2- Denying to Accept it.

Which one is worst?...I honestly don't know...

Let me try to explain it again...

Say you get two magnets and attach them together by normal opposite poles attraction...what happens then?

Answer: What happens is that you actually "made" a larger magnet with double the strength as a result of both attached magnets added up...simple right?

And you agree with me previously when I showed you what happens when two magnets are attached by attraction:

[IMG][/IMG]

AND NOT THIS BELOW:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now go back to your microscopic domain wall view per molecular structures...how will they align?

Answer: Exactly the same way as the previous two magnets attached above...except there are thousands or millions of them...and lined up in 3D structures/chains/bridges according to the magnet's volume...

And so every time you get a bunch of magnets and attach them together by their normal attraction...they will "UNIFY" into a big magnet with a CENTER MAIN DIVISION originated naturally and that not necessarily need to be a perfect line...nor a straight 2D plane.

I know for little kids this is kind of hard to understand...but how old are you now?....

The above image and sites...are just to demonstrate this Topic is absolutely NOT a new concept or discovery...that by moving the so called "Domain Wall" we obtain electric output...

However, above was referred to Nano scale Models where outputs are given in Micro Volts (uV)...in my video I demonstrate a much higher output is available by different type of displacements vectors and exciters.
Plus it was dedicated not to a Domain Wall...but to a Dielectric Plane Demonstration of its existence.

That was the best one you have shot so far...I thought you knew better than that!

You know the Scope, any scope, would "interpret" (meaning process) ANY Signal...and send it to screen the right way?...no matter if I just use One Terminal...the "Positive" or the Probe Pen without the gator clips?

It would invert the polarity. The scope doesn't know positive and negative. It displays the signal as is. Inverting the probe is to invert the signal.

See, that is your problem on above quoted post...you keep looking at the microscopic levels while ignoring (or simply denying to accept) the Big Picture. And I really can not understand why?...if you can find those images all over the net!!!

And I have uploaded some of them that I thought displayed a better understanding into my Photobucket, for you to analyze better on this Forum previously...now I see it was in vain...so, my final conclusion is that you are in one of those two "States of Mind" I cited before...or maybe both simultaneously, idk...:

1- Ignoring it.
2- Denying to Accept it.

Which one is worst?...I honestly don't know...

Let me try to explain it again...

Say you get two magnets and attach them together by normal opposite poles attraction...what happens then?

Answer: What happens is that you actually "made" a larger magnet with double the strength as a result of both attached magnets added up...simple right?

And you agree with me previously when I showed you what happens when two magnets are attached by attraction:

[IMG][/IMG]

AND NOT THIS BELOW:

[IMG][/IMG]

Now go back to your microscopic domain wall view per molecular structures...how will they align?

Answer: Exactly the same way as the previous two magnets attached above...except there are thousands or millions of them...and lined up in 3D structures/chains/bridges according to the magnet's volume...

And so every time you get a bunch of magnets and attach them together by their normal attraction...they will "UNIFY" into a big magnet with a CENTER MAIN DIVISION originated naturally and that not necessarily need to be a perfect line...nor a straight 2D plane.

I know for little kids this is kind of hard to understand...but how old are you now?....

Hi Ufo,

So we agree there are millions of domains in your magnet, not just two, correct? Next step: Please clarify, do you believe all the South domains migrate to the red end of the magnet and all the North domains to the blue end?

Or as I believe, that the magnetic material is essentially homogeneous down to the microscopic level and that the material in the red area is the same as the material in the blue area? And that on a microscopic investigation, it all looks the same, even the middle where you claim there is a wall. The middle is just like all the rest of the magnet.

The North and South poles (or Blue and Red) are just visualization aids to identify the direction of the field.

So again, my point, there is nothing in the middle of the magnet different from the rest of the magnet. If you want to imagine an invisible dielectric inertial plane there, fine with me, but I see no value in it.

If the Magnetic Viewing Film...reveals clearly the exact position where the "supposed" Domain Wall is in every magnet we approach it to...:

[IMG][/IMG]

With even millimeters of thickness in certain magnets and exactitude and accuracy/precision to almost molecular levels:

[IMG][/IMG]

Like in above Arc Segment of 2.5 mm thickness...

And "supposedly" a Domain Wall is to be "encrusted" within the magnet's mass right?...meaning it "supposedly" ONLY EXIST within where the "physical" domains are located...in the very crust and intrinsically "built in" the magnet's mass...

Then how come it could be clearly seen...that same light green stripe appear right in the middle of nowhere...right on Space...right in the center between Two Magnets separated by an Air Gap..?

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

Who is gonna answer that?

Bistander...You are welcome here...well... after you finally accept there IS the existence of a Main Domain Wall in the center of every magnet...of course.

First notice that NO MOVING BODIES are present at any of the tests conducted.(Conductor(s) or Magnet) and that such motion (derivative of Time)from at least one of the bodies must be present in the typical Faraday-Maxwell-Lenz equations to obtain a Positive or Counter EMF from that type of Induction.

During all testing on above Video, the magnet and conductors/coils remain static by firmly attached to a very heavy piece of steel.

In my opinion, you are altering the magnetic flux pattern when you introduce the iron cylinder into the magnet circuit. This action changes the flux lines cutting the coil and therefore represents dΦ/dt. The change of the flux does not require movement of the coil or of the magnet.

Hi Ufo,

I'd like to revisit the moving body concept. I say the placement of the iron cylinder constitutes altering the magnetic flux pattern thru the coil even though the coil and magnet are stationary. If I understand you, you claim that the stationary coil and magnet rules out magnet induction as the cause of the observed voltage spike. Below is a motor (or generator) which operates on this same principle, ie. stationary magnet and coil and moving iron. The diagrams demonstrate the changing flux thru the coils. Is it not the same as your set up, only you have a simpler magnetic circuit with a much larger air gap?

Bistander...You are welcome here...well... after you finally accept there IS the existence of a Main Domain Wall in the center of every magnet...of course.

I say there are domain walls at the center of the magnet and throughout the rest of the magnet. But I see no proof of a "Main Domain Wall".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ufopolitics

Who is gonna answer that?

I gave it a shot here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bistander

Inside the magnet there is not an all North domain on one end and an all South domain on the other end divided by a wall down the middle. I don't believe there is anything "in" the magnet in the middle which shows as the white line on your images. I think the line on the images results from the directional flow of magnetic flux which is all parallel to the magnet's axis at that location meaning no flux in the perpendicular direction to intersect with the viewing film and react with the medium and light. * A quote from Timm@Ferrocell USA at the Ferrocell reply #4 appears to support my thoughts.

Quote:

A Ferrocell will pass light where the flux "isn't" (the lowest potential), and appears in a different vector in relation to the location of incoming light.

I don't know if there is or is not a dielectric inertial plane there. I don't know what a dielectric inertial plane is or how it interacts with our world. I also do not feel that the interesting patterns from ferrocells and CRTs using magnets depict magnetic flux fields (follow the magnetic flux lines). When we use magnets they are not stand-alone chunks being held behind a viewing screen. The magnets are in a machine like a motor or such which will have a magnetic circuit containing the magnetic field. The pattern seen on the stand-alone magnet hardly represents the useful flux field in most cases.

So we agree there are millions of domains in your magnet, not just two, correct? Next step: Please clarify, do you believe all the South domains migrate to the red end of the magnet and all the North domains to the blue end?

Domains do not "migrate" as in "physically" displace/transport from one end to the other within the mass of the magnet...come on Bistander!

All this domains do is RE-ORIENT their magnetic polarization in a very fast "3D CHAIN REACTION", and that takes place in nano seconds...the iron molecules are all in the same exact place.

Quote:

Or as I believe, that the magnetic material is essentially homogeneous down to the microscopic level and that the material in the red area is the same as the material in the blue area? And that on a microscopic investigation, it all looks the same, even the middle where you claim there is a wall. The middle is just like all the rest of the magnet.

You have to learn how to separate magnetic orientation from physical molecular mass even at microscopic levels.

For God sake...It is so simple!...you get a non magnetized iron bar, then you magnetize it by electrification in one way your DC energy flow...so you get a North and a South at each ends...NOW, REVERT the Electrification Process again...then, where you had a South, now you have a North...while all those iron particles are still in the same exact place...no deformation, nor displacement of any particle has occurred!

Quote:

The North and South poles (or Blue and Red) are just visualization aids to identify the direction of the field.

Ok..."direction of the field" Uh?...how is that "direction"?...a straight vector?...or a spiral CURLED VECTOR?...

Quote:

So again, my point, there is nothing in the middle of the magnet different from the rest of the magnet. If you want to imagine an invisible dielectric inertial plane there, fine with me, but I see no value in it.

Regards,

bi

Davis-Rawls Scientific Investigations date back to 1936...:

[IMG][/IMG]

What you are trying to deny above (The Existence of a Domain Wall in every center of a Magnet)...is NOT the main Topic of this Thread.

You are trying to deny a discovery that was made a very long time ago...and that many, many Books, Science Articles and else...have shown, developed and demonstrated all over.

Therefore, I am really sorry, because I liked your debate...However. I can not try to illustrate nor enlighten a knowledge you deliberately deny to accept. Unfortunately, by not accepting even a Domain Wall in the center of every magnet...I much less would expect you will start a logical debate about a much complex field like is a Dielectric Plane substituting/replacing what you don't believe it exists.

So, I believe you really should maintain like your name means: A Bistander on this Thread...

I'd like to revisit the moving body concept. I say the placement of the iron cylinder constitutes altering the magnetic flux pattern thru the coil even though the coil and magnet are stationary. If I understand you, you claim that the stationary coil and magnet rules out magnet induction as the cause of the observed voltage spike. Below is a motor (or generator) which operates on this same principle, ie. stationary magnet and coil and moving iron. The diagrams demonstrate the changing flux thru the coils. Is it not the same as your set up, only you have a simpler magnetic circuit with a much larger air gap?

It would invert the polarity. The scope doesn't know positive and negative. It displays the signal as is. Inverting the probe is to invert the signal.

I know that.

The issue was about "forcing" the scope to display a one way signal...by not testing other options like changing the scope connectors.

In the case of the video, by just swapping the coil or the copper elements is exactly the same thing as to reverse the connectors from scope while leaving the elements or coil the same way. I chose to swap the coils, leaving scope probe connected the same way through whole video...it is easier to understand one way or the other that the source signal has changed polarity when moving dielectric field towards North or towards South.

The same as your iron cylinder does. Just that your set-up uses more air in the magnetic path. But the iron cylinder changes the flux pattern when it is placed on magnet.

NO, NEGATIVE, The Iron Cylinder on video does NOT "Transfer" any magnetic fields simply because I do NOT use a secondary field / magnet on top, in between or anywhere else...so there are absolutely no fields transferring!

That Iron Cylinder EXPANDS ONLY the UPPER Polarization (Pole) thus, DISPLACING the Dielectric Field from the Magnet towards the Top of Coil as well.

The Upper Pole climbs into the Iron Cylinder, that fact is also shown on video through Viewing Film.

But like I wrote before...IF You are not able to see the basic and old Main Domain Wall in EVERY Magnet...How could we expect that you see beyond into more clever magnetic geometries?

In speaking of “magnetism”, the immediate connotation is that of (N and S) polarity, however this spatial abstraction does not exist. Magnetism is but one force itself, however, as magnetism is purely spatial in denotation it is polarized but as one moving Ether ‘sink’ and ‘bubble’; magnetism has but one movement not two, nor ‘two poles’, CW and CCW are spatial abstractions of a singular movement of the magnetic field itself. There are no static fields.

[IMG][/IMG]

Quote:

The ‘polarized’ conception of magnetic ‘polarity’ is a long held intellectual defect in electro-magnetic geometric understanding.

Quote:

Any spatial distention is naturally ‘polarized’ definitionally by distention. A spinning object of any variety appears to be moving clockwise from one end, and counterclockwise from the other, however the object is moving in one direction, it has ‘no concept’ of poles or polarity, only the ignorant humans scratching their heads have this perceptual defect.